4 ms·

> Nobody is forcing you to use redux, you don't need it This is hand-waving to deflect Redux from legit criticisms, and is part of the reason I find both respo

> Nobody is forcing you to use redux, you don't need it This is hand-waving to deflect Redux from legit criticisms, and is part of the reason I find both responses frustrating and unnecessarily dismissive. You need to build your own framework for React SPAs because they're intentionally un-opinionated about the pieces you use. Just look at the scaffolding in place for create react app and all the various libraries. I would much rather solve real problems than discuss how to get Immutable to play nicely with Typescript or argue thinks vs. middleware. "Get good" is a poor response to anyone wanting to see the wildly used/discussed state management solution for React get better, and implies that there aren't good devs out there with experience outside of JavaScript saying there is a better way. You're right though - there are choices. I didn't like how the JavaScript ecosystem was progressing so I made a choice to not deal with it anymore professionally and it's been a very rewarding career change.

root_axis 9y ago
> This is hand-waving to deflect Redux from legit criticisms The comment I responded to is complaining that a list of tools makes them feel exhausted, that's not "legit criticism" that's low-effort whining. The legit criticism already received a response in the form of a list of tools meant to obviate the specific issues outlined by the critic, but somehow those tools being available is cynically characterized as a negative thing because some people don't know when or how to use those tools. That's their fault, not the tool's. > You need to build your own framework for React SPAs because they're intentionally un-opinionated about the pieces you use This is an engineering trade-off, it's not inherently wrong or bad; it's like whining that you have to spend time learning how and when to use a clutch when operating a manual transmission vehicle when an automatic would just figure it all out for you. Sorry, just because an automatic has a lower learning curve doesn't mean its a superior car, it's just a tradeoff, convenience over control. > I would much rather solve real problems than discuss how to get Immutable to play nicely with Typescript or argue thinks vs. middleware. So. Don't. Do. That. You don't need those things to use React, that's a choice you're making because you apparently desire the features that those tools afford you as a developer, yet you're complaining because you don't like the consequences of the engineering decisions YOU made. I've written and deployed around eight React projects into production and while some of them use immutable.js, none of them use typescript because the team's experience with typescript is limited. You see that? We don't know how to use typescript... so we don't... and everything is fine. > "Get good" is a poor response to anyone wanting to see the wildly used/discussed state management solution for React get better, My response is not "get good", my response is quit complaining that tools exist that you don't like. You don't have to use them, especially in the React world where you get to pick and choose the tools that work best for you; if you find the choices overwhelming that's your fault, it's not the tools fault that it exists. > and implies that there aren't good devs out there with experience outside of JavaScript saying there is a better way. This is hilariously arrogant. People who don't work with JavaScript want to complain that there is a better way to do work in JavaScript. If there is a better way then put your keyboard where your mouth is and build something better rather than complaining about the existence of tools you don't like.

root_axis 9y ago

> This is hand-waving to deflect Redux from legit criticisms The comment I responded to is complaining that a list of tools makes them feel exhausted, that's not "legit criticism" that's low-effort whining. The legit criticism already received a response in the form of a list of tools meant to obviate the specific issues outlined by the critic, but somehow those tools being available is cynically characterized as a negative thing because some people don't know when or how to use those tools. That's their fault, not the tool's. > You need to build your own framework for React SPAs because they're intentionally un-opinionated about the pieces you use This is an engineering trade-off, it's not inherently wrong or bad; it's like whining that you have to spend time learning how and when to use a clutch when operating a manual transmission vehicle when an automatic would just figure it all out for you. Sorry, just because an automatic has a lower learning curve doesn't mean its a superior car, it's just a tradeoff, convenience over control. > I would much rather solve real problems than discuss how to get Immutable to play nicely with Typescript or argue thinks vs. middleware. So. Don't. Do. That. You don't need those things to use React, that's a choice you're making because you apparently desire the features that those tools afford you as a developer, yet you're complaining because you don't like the consequences of the engineering decisions YOU made. I've written and deployed around eight React projects into production and while some of them use immutable.js, none of them use typescript because the team's experience with typescript is limited. You see that? We don't know how to use typescript... so we don't... and everything is fine. > "Get good" is a poor response to anyone wanting to see the wildly used/discussed state management solution for React get better, My response is not "get good", my response is quit complaining that tools exist that you don't like. You don't have to use them, especially in the React world where you get to pick and choose the tools that work best for you; if you find the choices overwhelming that's your fault, it's not the tools fault that it exists. > and implies that there aren't good devs out there with experience outside of JavaScript saying there is a better way. This is hilariously arrogant. People who don't work with JavaScript want to complain that there is a better way to do work in JavaScript. If there is a better way then put your keyboard where your mouth is and build something better rather than complaining about the existence of tools you don't like.